About your Search

20120901
20120930
SHOW
Book TV 17
( more )
STATION
CSPAN 48
CSPAN2 43
FOXNEWS 37
MSNBC 37
MSNBCW 37
WHUT (Howard University Television) 32
CNN 26
CNNW 26
WETA 18
KQED (PBS) 14
FBC 10
KRCB (PBS) 9
CNBC 8
WMPT (PBS) 8
KCSM (PBS) 7
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 453
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 460 (some duplicates have been removed)
, 2003, the united states was pushing very hard to get iran referred to the u.s. security council for not being forthcoming. remember that there was the war in iraq. there was a strong push on the part of the europeans, especially britain, germany, and france not to go to the security council because they saw iran going the way of iraq. going to the security council would be a mandate for war. countries like france had been at odds with the united states over iraq and did not want to be at odds with the u.s. over iran, but wanted to stop the united states from doing what it did to iraq. we had a dramatic event where the foreign ministers of germany, in october, 2003, struck an agreement where iran would embark on uranium enrichment. it is the ultimate in dual use technology. it had the united states stepping back and britain, germany, and france became known as the eu3. in november of 2004, iran went along with this saying they would also be a part of uranium enrichment. but he doesn't buy, eu3 was submitting a proposal to iran promising help for its program. this is where you get
at the importance of kazakhstan in the region, and it's a relationship which the united states. "this is america" visits of the republic of kazakhstan. "this is america" is made possible by -- the national education association, the nation's largest advocate for children and public education. poongsan corporation, forging a higher global standard. the ctc foundation, afo communications, and the rotondaro family trust. later, i will talk with kazakhstan's foreign minister. right now, a visit with the u.s. ambassador to kazakhstan, kenneth fairfax. >> what should americans know about kazakhstan? >> i think the short answer is a lot more than they currently do. >> thank you. >> it is the ninth largest country on earth. it is a country that has a rather extraordinary relations with the united states, and yet most people really know either nothing or worse than nothing -- what they have seen in a movie, which is the opposite of reality, of course. there is a lot to learn. >> what are the mutual interests of the two countries, the united states and kazakhstan? >> we have many. you can look at it as an
of 20% of iran's call for sanctions, the united states there is a problem that iran to want to negotiate for a position which has changed -- you talk about 20% -- they want sanctions to be lifted with them stopping 20%. the question is they are enriching. we said their right to enrich should be recognized and that would negate all the u.n. sanctions. the nuclear issue stems from u.n. security council issues. within the margins of this issue, there is room to change going forward. i think we may find that it is constrained by the fact that israel is still there. israel is not about to let go of its concerns. i think there has been a lack of dialogue. it would be good if the two sides could sit down together. they could start with this temple and hold discussions and feel of how each side can help each other. my advice for the u.s. diplomats would be to sit with them and say we are not going to talk about the nuclear issue, how is your family. there is the fact of just discussing. on the other side, there is the problem that it is not clear what the endgame is. we're calling on iran to sus
. but the u.s. has declined. the united states has never proposed iran a comprehensive package. never. my point is this. first, try at least once. i real hi don't care in iran whether we have a conservative or moderate president or reformist because i have been working for 16 years under the presidents and i know we did our utmost to get a good -- to bring the relation, to improve the relation with the u.s. and the u.s. always declined. therefore, this is the same policy during ahmadinajed. but they have better justification during ahmadinajed. they use the holocaust and all the these rhetorics which is very harmful for iran's national interests. my suggestion is this. any u.s. administration i hope after the election -- because we cannot talk before the election -- propose at least once after 33 years a comprehensive package including terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, peace process, israel, human rights, democracy, all these major points for the u.s. and iranians also they have their own shopping list. and the u.s. also should be prepared to address iranian concerns. if it failed,
for the united states. hundreds of libyans amassed outside the consulate, airing signs denouncing yesterday's violent destruction which led to the death of u.s. ambassador christopher stevens and three others. in addition libyan authorities arrested four men suspected of instigating the protests. president obama called both egyptian president morsi and magariaf. the two calls had decidedly different tones. president obama expressed appreciation to libyan president magariaf for the cooperation received from the libyan government and people in responding to the attack. though questions still remain about the role libyan terrorists played in escalating the attacks. with respect to egypt the president had made an interesting comment in an interview earlier yesterday with telemundo. >> would you consider the current egyptian regime an ally of the united states? >> obama: i don't think that we would consider them an ally but we don't consider them an enemy. >> eliot: against this backdrop, president obama's phone call with egyptia
about, this problem between israel and the united states over iran and what do we do about it? the prime minister is saying the united states ought to publicly draw a red line and tell iran you cannot go beyond this point in your nuclear weapons development. where do you see-- what do you see happening on this front? >> well, that's an approach i think that probably can't work, simply because the iranians may be doing things already that we don't know about. and i think it's legitimate to say, even if they don't cross the nuclear weapons threshold, if they get 90% of the way there, that's not a very comforting outcome. so let me suggest a different approach, bob. instead of red linees, let me suggest deadlines. what we ought to do is going to the iranians with a diplomatic offer and make clear what it is they have to stop doing-- all the enrichment material they have to get rid of, the international inspections they have to respect, and sanctions would be reduced and they would be out from under the risk of attack. if they don't meet the deadline, i think the united states, israel, and o
democratic majority in the house and senate and let us not forget a supreme court of the united states that was still fairly and the control of liberal democrats. 4 two brief shining years or perhaps baleful years if you don't like the great society but for two years for better or for worse the united states had a government in the way that we often seek of her majesty, having a government that is a group of people who can implement a party platform that can be judged at the next election or serious elections. that is not generally the way the united states operates. courtesy of the constitution drafted in 1787 and what i want to in sister relatively unamended thereafter with regard to the basic structures we live under. the republican president, president johnson, nixon, ford, reagan and george h. w. bush not for a single day had even a single house of congress from their own political party. ronald reagan did have the senate for four years but he never had a full congress that was republican. bill clinton did have a full congress that was republican but bill clinton was democrat. and
towards the united states and its citizens. >> schieffer: was this a long-planned attack, as far as you know. what do you know about that? >> the way this perpetrators acted, moved, and their choosing specific date for this so-called demonstration, i think we have no-- this leaves us with no doubt that this was preplanned, predetermined. >> schieffer: and you believe this was the work of al qaeda and you believe that it was led by foreigners. is that what you're telling us? >> it was plans definitely, was planned by forers, by people who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their arrival. >> schieffer: mr. president, is it safe for americans there now? >> the security situation is-- is difficult, not only for americans. even for libbians themselves. we don't know what are the real intentions. of these perpetrators. how they will react. but there is no specific particular concern, danger for americans or any other foreigners. but the situation is not easy to keep stability. yes >> mr. president, will it be safe for the f.b.i. investigators
., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 170 and the nays are mented mouse is -- the motion is not adopted. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. this will be a five-minute vote. a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 223 and the nays a
of the united states, giving his first extended response to questions about yesterday's events in benghazi, libya and in cairo, egypt. >> mr. president, for the first time since 1979, a sitting ambassador, christopher stevens, plus three other americans were killed in the line of duty. we send more than a billion dollars a year to egypt, tens of millions to libya after its liberation. is it time to reconsider foreign aid to countries where many of the people don't want us around? >> well, look, the united states doesn't have an option of withdrawing from the world, and we're the one indispensable nation. countries all around the world look to us for leadership, even countries where sometimes you experience protests. so it's important for us to stay engaged, but, obviously, what happened last night was heartbreaking. and libya in particular is a government that is very friendly towards us. the vast majority of libyans welcomed the united states' involvement. they understand that it's because of us that they got rid of a dictator who would crush their spirits for 40 years. many libyans came
the united states, i am sure libya receives money. it was even greater because the american ambassador -- i am supportive of the arab spring. the times and elsewhere, i said to myself, they are not great people. but they are people that surely will turn out nice to us. it doesn't make any sense. >> the events of the last week, the embassy attacks, it will result in a further ongoing shift of jewish americans changing -- >> i think there is a little more to follow. the shift in special elections indicated deep distrust of this administration. that was clear. what the administration said, you heard what the state said. the message was sent loud and clear. for a while, i think it was always together. we have heard the state department say that they have taken every reasonable step. we have heard the quote from the ambassador suggesting he was comfortable and these people love me. it's not true. he issued a statement saying he is very concerned about his own safety. again, we have an information gap. that is coming home to roost. this will build. >> today's new york times, the interview with th
. >> the united states condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. since our founding, the united states has been a nation that respects all faiths. we reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. but there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. none. >> not content to sit on the sidelines at a critical moment in his presidential campaign, governor mitt romney plunged himself into the middle of this developing crisis, sharply criticizing the president by a written statement last night and doubling down on that criticism this morning. >> when our grounds are being attacked and being breached, that the first response of the united states must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation. and apology for america's values is never the right course. the president and his administration have done something which is inconsistent with the principles of america. >> team romney has thus far focused its misleading attacks on a statement made by the u.s. embassy in cairo before any attacks began. it was a preemptive stat
leaders are leading the reform process. united states is committed to protecting the space for civil society to operate and the critical role plays in transitioning democracy all over the world. with a greater emphasis on a broader range of u.s. power, president obama succeeded in laying a new foundation for leadership in the world. nowhere do you see this more clearly than the commitment to the area that you focus on for the remainder of my remarks, the development in poverty and prosperity. the presiden was unapologetic, putting to rest the old myth that development is near charity. rejecting the notion that they were condemned by the gains in human developments. as such, the national security strategy recognizes development in the moral, strategic, and economic imperatives. on that day he announced the new u.s. global development policy. the premise is on the conviction that the ultimate goal of foreign assistance and development is to create the conditions with the assistance are no longer needed. focusing on helping these broad base -- is broadbased economic growth, prioritizing
know one thing about him. he does not fail. let's hear it for the next president of the united states. [applause] >> thanks, sweetie. that's quite an introduction here. i got how many introductions tonight? anyone else want to offer an introduction? thank you. this really is a critical time for the country, and i think a time of choice. elections are always about choice. i think the choice is in more stark relief than most electrics. i think in part because of where the country is. i think when you have $16 trillion in debt, when you see places like europe facing fiscal calamity or crisis, while you recognize these are critical times, what you have in this country, 23 million americans out of work, 23 million. when half the kids coming out of college can't find work or work consistent with an education that includes college, think about that? this is america. what's happened? and so the president and i offered two very distinct paths. his path is one which has been not just spoken about, we've seen it. we don't have to guess what his path might look like or what he would do, because h
the united states as the move towards a democracy. the obama administration has said it is considering using sanctions against myanmar, also known as burma. this is one hour and 15 minutes. >> well, welcome to all of you. this is my first official of bent as the new president. what a thrill, frankly, to be here with you. her first visit to the united states in 20 years. no. a 40 years. and she chose to come to the institute for her first public address. we have wonderful partners in the society. and the blue moon a society. we have a great relationship with the state department of secretary clinton today. a number of her colleagues are here. kurt campbell. in addition, i would like to particularly recognize a couple of our board members. without her, i do not think this event would have occurred. i would like to thank her for coming. i like to turn things over. [applause] >> i join with jim. i want to tell you that this is an extremely large and important a pleasure that we have in welcoming all of you here today. it is an event in honor of remarkable individual. we welcome you and your dele
intervening in syria. saying the body of the united states and iran is moving into syria and that spells big trouble for israel? >> indeed on whole range of fronts. their support for terrorism continues. they have influenced the regime in iraq and prepared to shed a lot of syrian blood to stay in power. they finance hezbollah and hamas in gaza strip and worse of all they continue to build a broad and nuclear weapons program. what is unmistakable despite the blurs ter that is coming from the obama administration, they are not afraid of the united states. they do not fear this president. they do not fear the united states. they do not fear consequences for their actions. as long as that belief holds true in tehran they will continue to support terrorists and build a nuclear weapons program. >> greta: a u.s. senator once said to me while i was lamenting there were so many problems across the world, he said to me we can't solve the problems, we can only manage them. that should be our goal in light of the fact so many variables. are we managing these different hot spots around the world and give
and millions of their citizens want to build futures in the united states. there's no argument from me there on american exceptionalism, but you argue it's not our ideals that make us exceptional. what do you mean by that? >> i do think so some extent it's our ideals. arabs express tremendous admiration for our ideals and principles and institution of our government. they're outraged by the gap that they perceive between the pay in which we live here in the united states and our conduct in their part of the world. all that being said, we're left with the situation in the middle east right now where no other country has the capacity to do the kinds of things that the united states can do. no other country has the capacity to help the arab world in the ways that the united states can help the arab world, and that's why you still see people like president mohamed morsi, the first civilian elected islamic president of egypt. the muslim brotherhood has a long history of being opposed to the u.s. relations but seeking debt relief and help from the imf. other countries look to the united stat
are not going to t along with anyone, so why try to pacify them? england, the united states, get out of the united nations. i'm tired of hearing hate speeches from people from other countries condemning us. this is a united nations of hate. host: if you go to the united nations web site, it says -- what you think? caller: i think at the time it was probably a good thing, but i don't think they counted on the rise of communism from china and russia and on the muslims and i think the muslims are a big problem with the united nations right now and we should stop trying to pacify them. we have a wenow who seems to sit there and watched-- we have a president now who seems to sit there and watch it. all he has been doing is apologizing. they killed two of our soldiers in afghanistan and the apologized to them. when the embassy was attacked, it was the man who had the movie's iffault. these people hate us. host: here is this on twitter -- here's the washington post front page -- many remember last year when the palestinian leader's request for membership was denied, not something supported
. >> foreign policy is back in the headlines. >> violent protests against the united states. >> four americans including our ambassador to libya have been killed. >> this morning romney used the trajty to criticize the agenda. >> this is no time for politics. >> did the romney campaign jump the gun last night. >> it's disgraceful. >> it's disgraceful that the obama administration first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks. >> justice will be done. >> team romney has -- >> we shouldn't be on an apology tour. >> the original statements by the cairo embassy were long before. >> six hours before these protests even started. >> it suggests a level of desperation. >> the desperate reach by mitt romney. >> that makes him look a little bit out of touch. >> contracts and tone deaf. >> how did mitt romney get into this mess? >> he needs to be severely aggressive. >> the first response to the united states must be outrage. >> be very aggressive. >> well he aggressively shot himself in the foot. >> do not seem crass. >> he has a
continuing interest in military matters. now, in 1917 the united states goes to war. fdr goes to see what your willson and tells him he wants to resign his post and he wants to be in uniform. wilson said know you're doing an important job where you are. when the united states is deeply involved in world war i, she's determined to get to the western front and against the resistance of his boss, the navy secretary daniels manages and their key to that office in a vaguely military uniform of his own devising. he wears pants tucked into he was a french army helmet and a gas mask. in september of 1939 ranks summer and then came portugal and bulgaria. he's the commander-in-chief of the army that trans with trucks marked tank and whose soldiers trained with hand grenades substituted by eggs. by the time the war has been underway for a number of months, clinton is pretty much with its back to the wall to countries and the netherlands and as most france, denmark, norway have been conquered by the germans and the invasion of britain seems imminent he's determined to try to do something to help the
for the country. against perceived internal and external dangerous forces. israel, united states, first at the regime. vicious than enough of that over the decades and afterward he went from credence to that notion, that paranoia. so the syrian population made this bargain with the regime that they would give freedoms in return for stability and security, especially with the examples of instability in lebanon and iraq on their borders. and so, that was the mandate. that was legitimacy for the asides to rule. they lost that because of the policy and bashar al-assad unleashing the dogs in terms of cracking down the opposition. his policy in instability and insecurity. so he no longer has legitimacy. in a broader sense he is solid. whether he stays in power, he'll never have the mandate to rule again and legitimacy he once enjoyed. >> host: are western policymakers assuming his fall is inevitable? and should they? >> guest: that's interesting. i've been contacted by media outlets wanting a quarter to an obituary for about a year now. every time the call, i say it's premature because the re
. >> the united states will not allow iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. we'll do what it takes to prevent that from happening. all options remain on the table. the president has been very clear and that includes the military option. >> shannon: our ambassador to the united nations says the u.s. will stand with israel and do what it takes to stop oran from developing a nuclear weapon, as israeli prime minister netanyahu says iran is 7 to 8 months away from being able to build a nuclear bomb and demands that the united states give a red line to iran. we start with peter doos gee senator john mechanic cane said an hour and-a-half that he thinks the united states is sing exactly the wrong main to the israelis about whether or not we will have their back, if iran gets closer to building a nuclear weapon. >> we keep tells the israelis not to attack, shouldn't we be telling the iranians that that we are with israel and they should back down. >> reporter: the u.s. bamdass dorto the u.n. says that the united states will do whatever it takes to prevent iran from acquiring the nuclear weapon and the
way? what constitutes the wrong way? here in united states and in the middle east there is enormous debate over how to handle iran's pursuit of a nuclear enrichment capability, a capability which would give iran the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons if they chose to do so. and obvious a this is an issue that's been with us for a very long time. i remember i first encountered it in immediate aftermath of the gulf war in 1991 when israel purchased 25 longer-range f-15 e. strike fighters. and those fighters were designated not f-15 e., but f-15-i. and the manufacture said that the i was for israel. if you spoke to israeli air force pilots and commanders, what the uniform would say to you is now now now that i is for iraq. this is an issue, this is a problem, it is a threat that the israelis have been thinking about for a very long time. they has been a great deal of effort trying to figure out how to develop a military option to disarm iran, to destroy its nuclear program if they ever chose to do so. and they've been working very deciduous lead at the. but by the same token, you w
>>> this is "gps," the "global public square." welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world, i'm fareed zakaria. we have a smart show for you today. we'll talk mostly about what else has been going on in the world outside of the democratic national convention. >>> things have heated up with regard to iran and israel, with syria, with afghanistan. i've got a great panel to discuss all of it. anne-marie slaughter, richard haass, martin indyk. >>> then, a different spin on a familiar question in the presidential campaign. will americans be better off four years from now? one of the world's top bankers, roger altman, thinks so. harvard's niall ferguson isn't so sure. >>> next up, can't we just predict the election results now and be done with it? i'll ask nate silver, "the new york times'" brilliant statistician. >>> also, the crisis you don't know enough about that could have a big impact around the globe. >>> first, here's my take. both conventions are done, and what can we say about the upcoming campaign and election? well, one hearty prediction about ele
that it is going as you will understand the united states we understand of madison and jefferson and washington how they form the country but would be a very good basis for understanding what was going on in the united states so current china was very much shaped by deng xiaoping. he came to power in 1978 and was the dominant person right up until 1992 for the period of about 14 years. what i thought i would do in the brief time today i was told to not talk for more than 20 minutes would be to talk about some of the forces that shaped what he was and what he did to transform china because 1978 the country that he inherited had a per capita income of less than $100 per capita. now is estimated somewhere rs/6000 and it's on the path of that he is headed on. there is almost no migration from the countryside in the city and since he came perhaps 200 million have moved from the countryside to the town and the city. when he came to power the country was still involved in the cultural revolution and the relevant nettie toward each other and he worked to unite the country to set it on the new path. what ar
outgoing mexican president felipe calderon on his country's relations with the united states. >> president obama held a campaign rally in milwaukee over the weekend, one month before early voting begins in this battleground state of wisconsin. [cheers and applause] >> this was the president's first visit to the state since february. a recent quinnipiac university/new york times/cbs poll of likely voters in wisconsin found president obama leading mitt romney 51-45%. this is about half an hour. [cheers and applause] ♪ ♪ ♪ [cheers and applause] >> hello, wisconsin! [cheers and applause] oh! hi! you guys sound like you're fired up already! [cheers and applause] it is good to be back in milwaukee! [cheers and applause] first of all, it's good to be back because this is the closest i've been the home in a couple of months -- [cheers and applause] i was thinking about hopping on the freeway and just driving on down. you know, hour and a half, maybe a little shorter with a motorcade, you know? [laughter] i am also glad to be in milwaukee because before i came out here, i was able to have an
. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c, september 21, 2012. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable richard blumenthal, a senator from the state of connecticut, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader smed. mr. reid: i had move to proceed to calendar number 504. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 504, s. 3525, a bill to protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fish, and shooting and for other purposes. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: the next hour will be equally divided between the two leader leaders who are their designees.
will look at its importance in the region and its relationship with the united states. "this is america" visits the republic of kazakhstan. "this is america" is made possible by -- the national education association, the nation's largest advocate for children and public education. poongsan corporation, forging a higher global standard. the ctc foundation, afo communications, and the rotondaro family trust. this year, kazakhstan celebrates its 20th anniversary of independence. on this program, we will learn about what it was like before independence 20 years ago, and y president made kazakhstan the success it is today and why diversifying its economy will be the key to kazakhstan's even brighter future. >> it was a while the economy, while business economy, and a great economy mainly. today, we have a lot of public companies. our businessmen are doing international joint ventures. if you take the society as a whole, are people became much more open-minded, a free, outspoken people, and we are much different from what we were before. >> has that been exciting to be a part of? >> i was 20
, but that is critical cause more trouble than any of the problem we've got fiscally in the united states. getting medicare costs under control is the number-one thing. >> you say we also surcharged smokers and the obese for their medicare coverage. where did that idea come from? >> i am the person that put it in the memo but i didn't have to fight very hard for it. also, i ran into this, something i ran in "the washington post" install of calling people morbidly obese i called them mega fatties and i was refuted by "the washington post" for being insensitive, which i guess i probably am. this is another thing where everybody knows this to be true and someone has to pay for it. there should be penalties. i'm not really a democrat but i'm certainly democrat compared to him. you have to be responsible to some extent for your personal behavior. someone is going to pay for it. >> quite right. we should point out also we are not only ones making arguments like this. there are other bipartisan commissions and so forth. the task force that was headed by a was rivlin and pete domenici, a democrat and repu
. the impasse is just one of the many strains on relations between russia and the united states. iran is another is the dis trust over nato's defense shield. earlier this month the u.s. agency of the international development to lead russia. i'm pleased to have sergey lavrov back at this table, welcome. >> thank you very much, nice to be back. >> rose: u.s.-russia relations. >> yes, i believe we agree that these relations should be promoted. when president obama came to the whitehouse, he and his team assessed the relationship between moscow and washington and suggested what they call the reset of those relations which we supported. and i believe that since then, we have been having understanding between us, between moscow and russia, that the really mutually beneficial partnership in the interest of the russian and american people in the interest of international relations given the importance of the two countries can be based on equal, mutually respectful, mually beneficial relatiohip. and on that route, we achieved quite a lot. i would be incomplete if i don't mention that there are problems
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 460 (some duplicates have been removed)